The Palm Beach Post from West Palm Beach, Florida · Page 61

Page 61 article text (OCR)

f
4
16A
THE
PALM
BEACH
POST
TUESDAY,
MARCH
31,
1998
The
Palm
Beach
Post
TOM
GlUFFRIDA,
Publisher
EDWARD
SEARS,
Editor
LON
DANIELSON,
General
Manager
TOM
O'HARA,
Managing
Editor
RANDY
SCHULTZ,
Editor
of
the
Editorial
Page
JAN
TUCKWOOD,
Associate
Editor
LARRY
KLINE,
VP
Advertising
LARRY
SIEDLIK,
VP&
Treasurer
GALE
HOWDEN,
Direror,
Community
Relations
TOM
HIGHFIELD,
Circulation
UNDA
MURPHY,
Oifrir,
ia
Resources
BOB
BALFE,
Owrfor.
Production
KEN
WALTERS,
Director,
Marketing
and
Research
v
)
J
I
mmh
(S$k
Legislators
catch
rays
as
state's
tax
roof
sags
Jf
LEGISLATURE
Title
IX
spawn
raises
idiocy
quota
Toting
heads
for
outcome-based
gender
equity
could
reduce
financing
for
medical
and
scientific
research.
The
state
budget,
normally
the
main
attraction
this
time
of
year
in
Tallahassee,
seems
to
have
become
the
non-event
of
the
1998
legislative
session.
The
House
passed
a
plan
to
spend
$44.8
billion,
and
the
Senate
approved
spending
$45.2
billion.
Teams
from
each
chamber
began
meeting
this
week
to
smooth
out
the
$355
million
difference
with
plenty
of
time
left
and
an
abundance
of
amity.
Indeed,
some
House
members
talk
of
finishing
both
the
budget
and
the
session
before
the
scheduled
adjournment
May
1.
The
budget
is
the
one
thing
the
Florida
Constitution
requires
them
to
pass.
This
year,
a
booming
economy
and
the
settlement
with
the
tobacco
companies
give
them
6
percent
more
money
than
last
year.
That
could
make
it
an
easy
year
for
lawmakers
to
try
something
hard,
like
reforming
the
tax
structure
that
produced
the
financial
feast.
It
is,
after
all,
the
same
tax
structure
that
produced
the
famines
of
the
early
1990s.
The
roof
isn't
leaking,
so
nobody
is
trying
to
fix
it,
Not
Gov.
Chiles,
not
the
candidates
to
be
governor
next
year,
certainly
not
the
lawmakers
basking
in
the
sun.
Next
time
it
rains,
however,
the
economic
carpet
will
be
ruined
again.
The
sad
thing
is
that
tax
reform
would
not
cost
the
state
money,
and
reform
could
include
a
tax
cut.
The
House
and
Senate
set
aside
$100
million
to
reduce
unspecified
taxes.
Each
chamber
has
members
with
$1
billion
worth
of
ideas
for
where
to
cut.
It
would
be
easier
to
cut
taxes
if
we
had
a
sensible
tax
base.
Sen.
John
Ostalkiewicz,
R-Orlando,
wants
to
target
the
quirky
intangibles
tax.
That's
a
fine
target.
But
the
tax
on
stocks,
bonds
and
other
securities
takes
in
more
than
$1
billion,
and
trying
to
Writes
Ms.
Gavora:
"Too
many
men
in
;
gunnery
school?
Too
few
men
getting
day-;
care
training
from
Indian
Affairs?
You've;
got
a
federal
case."
That's
funny.
This
is
not:
Counting
male
and
female
heads
for
outcome-based
gender
equity
could
affect
financing
for
medical
and
scientific
research
down
the;
road.
The
National
Science
Foundation,
for
;
instance,
doles
out
more
than
$109
million
annually
to
undergraduate
programs
in
science,
engineering
and
math
all
male-,
dominated
fields.
,
What
happens
to
that
money
if
more!
women
don't
sign
up?
What
happens
to
us
if
the
best
and
brightest
don't
get
the
education
they
seek?
;
Congress
has
the
power
to
stop
this
silliness.
If
the
new
regulations
don't
reflect
the
intent
of
the
original
statute
and
they
don't
since
it
specifically
forbids
quotas
Congress
can
hold
hearings
and
block
the
Justice
Department.
Unfortu-;
nately,
few
are
willing
to
buck
the
trend.
;
When
the
Women's
NBA
made
its
!
debut
last
year,
sponsors
Coca-Cola,
Nike
!
and
American
Express
hailed
the
event
with
banners
reading:
"Thanks
Title
IX."
Such
is
today's
gender
Zeitgeist
and
any-.
one
who
dissents
is
sexist.
J
This
is
pure
nonsense,
with
potential
'
consequences
that
are
purely
serious.
The
rule
is
this:
Quotas
mean
lower!
standards,
which
mean
reduced
quality,
i
Thanks,
Title
IX.
0f
the
prospect
of
socialized
medicine
wasn't
enough
to
make
you
give
up
your
fois
gras
and
Macanudos,
stand
by
for
gender-outcome
education.
If
all
goes
as
promised,
President
Clinton's
latest
gender
equity
plan
will
mean
that
equal
numbers
of
men
and
women
must
be
rocket
scientists
and
brain
surgeons
whether
they
want
to
be
or
not.
Kathleen
Parker
Such
is
the
bastard
offspring
of
Title
IX,
the
federal
statute
originally
designed
to
prevent
discrimination
in
college
athletic
programs.
Now
the
regulation
is
being
expanded
to
apply
to
academic
programs
as
well.
Forget
discrimination,
we're
talking
about
the
Q-word.
Quotas.
During
the
past
20
years,
Title
IX
has
been
interpreted
and
enforced
as
follows:
If
a
student
body
is
comprised
of
50
percent
women,
then
50
percent
of
athletic
programs
have
to
be
filled
with
women.
Even
if
women
aren't
interested.
Thus,
at
schools
where
not
enough
women
have
been
interested
in
participating
in
college
sports,
a
proportionate
number
of
men's
sports
have
had
to
be
elimi
nated.
The
casualty
list
is
long
and
includes
Boston
University
s
Division
I
men
s
base
ball
team
and
football
program,
as
well
as
UCLA's
men's
swimming,
water
polo
and
gymnastics
programs,
which
through
the
years
have
produced
22
Olympic
swimming
competitors
and
gymnasts.
Not
enough
women
competing
in
col
lege
athletics?
Must
be
discrimination.
goes
the
hysteria.
Bye-bye
goes
the
men's
Bad
favor,
bad
outrage
Feminists
headed
off
at
reduce
that
by
$100
million
only
would
make
the
tax
quirkier.
House
Speaker
Dan
Webster
suggests
exempting
pur
chases
of
clothing
that
cost
less
than
$25.
His
heart
is
with
the
neediest
taxpayers,
but
his
brainstorm
would
cause
chaos
and
confusion
in
stores
collecting
sales
tax
and
in
the
Depart
ment
of
Revenue
trying
to
administer
it.
Rep.
Bob
Starks,
R-Casselberry,
a
pilot,
would
use
a
big
chunk
of
the
$100
million
to
reward
airlines
for
serving
Orlando.
Bringing
tourists
to
the
Mouse
is
rewarding
enough.
A
sales-tax
ex
emption
there
would
be
one
more
hole
in
the
colander
of
a
sales
tax
that,
with
all
its
holes,
still
accounts
for
72
percent
of
the
state
s
general
revenue.
Lawmakers
could
add
money
for
schools
and
reduce
the
required
local
effort"
districts
must
make
with
proper
ty
taxes.
But
school
boards,
not
law
makers,
would
get
the
glory
from
lower
property
taxes.
The
way
to
give
everyone
a
tax
cut
would
be
to
cut
the
sales
tax
rate
from
its
current
6
percent.
A
half-cent
of
sales
tax
raises
more
than
$1
billion.
No
one
talks
that
big.
The
way
to
cut
the
sales-tax
rate
is
to
start
by
getting
rid
of
some
exemptions
so
the
smaller
rate
can
pay
for
itself.
That,
however,
would
risk
offending
special
interests
that
lobbied
for
their
exemptions.
When
it's
time
for
tax
reform,
lawmakers
take
Homer
Simpson's
advice
to
Bart:
"If
something's
too
hard,
it's
not
worth
doing."
vis
a
controversial
zoning
change
shows,
Palm
Beach
County
commissioners
apply
ethics
selectively.
the
county
commission
in
October
reaffirmed
the
switch
to
commercial
use.
That
was
a
mistake.
The
zoning
never
was
changed
because
an
agent
for
Dr.
Roberts
withdrew
the
request
for
change
after
the
sale
fell
through.
In
other
words,
because
the
staff
didn't
check
all
the
documents,
the
county
commission
"reaffirmed"
a
zoning
change
that
never
really
happened.
The
county
discovered
this
mess
because
Lantana
residents
complained
their
commissioner,
Warren
Newell.
Newell
was
right
to
ask
for
a
staff
investigation.
Dr.
Roberts
says
he'll
pursue
the
change.
He
shouldn't
get
it.
Commissioner
McCarty
says
the
whole
thing
was
"an
egregious
act."
That's
the
same
Mary
McCarty
who
sees
no
conflict
of
interest
in
taking
personal
vacations
with
the
county's
most
prominent
lobbyist.
If
the
county
created
an
Ethics
Zone
for
commissioners,
it
would
have
to
be
low-density.
trash
talk
franchise
fee
of
3
to
6
percent
on
its
Wellington
revenues.
Some
consultants'
fees
are
one-time
startup
costs
that
should
pay
for
themselves
over
time.
A
consultant's
advice
impact
fees,
for
example,
is
expected
bring
the
village
another
$1
million
to
million
in
revenue.
Grant-writers
got
$40,000
brought
the
village
$400,000
in
grants.
And
now
that
the
village's
has
an
in-house
attorney,
some
the
high
legal
costs
for
legal
work
should
come
under
better
control.
Some
who
have
complained
about
consultants
are
the
same
people
charged
three
years
ago
that
taxes
would
increase
under
incorporation.
What
should
be
clear
now,
even
to
them,
is
that
the
main
reason
costs
go
is
that
residents
want
more
services.
Paying
for
expert
knowledge
in
city-buildtng
is
an
effort
to
do
things
right
first
time.
It's
an
attempt
to
use
tax
money
most
efficiently.
As
the
garbage
contract
showl
residents
are
far
better
off
with
Wellington
as
a
city.
CREATING
A
CITY
team.
The
same
sort
of
self-defeating
obsolescence
seems
inevitable
for
academic
programs
if
Mr.
Clinton
and
his
feminist
colleagues
have
their
way.
But
what
if
women
in
equal
numbers
to
men
don't
want
to
be
rocket
scientists
and
brain
surgeons?
How
do
you
make
women
clamor
for
chemistry
classes
if
they
prefer
17th-century
Spanish
poetry?
You
don't.
Instead,
you
punish
the
males
for
signing
up
in
such
large
numbers.
You
eliminate
the
chemistry
class
or,
since
the
low
female
numbers
must
indicate
discrimination,
you
withhold
federal
money.
Or,
you
deny
qualified
men
access.
The
new
regulations,
now
being
devised
by
the
U.S.
Department
of
Justice,
will
not
apply
only
to
colleges
and
universities.
Jessica
Gavora,
writing
in
the
Women's
Quarterly,
a
publication
of
the
Independent
Women's
Forum,
notes
that
some
of
the
$96
billion
in
education
money
the
federal
government
distributes
annually
go
to
state
and
local
governments,
private
business
and
museums.
Schools
operated
by
the
Department
of
Defense
and
the
Bureau
of
Indian
Affairs,
as
well
as
law
enforcement
training
conducted
by
the
Federal
Bureau
of
Investigation,
all
receive
federal
money.
All
will
come
under
scrutiny
under
the
regulations.
was
a
relationship,
how
do
we
know
that
it
was
welcomed
or
that
it
didn't
contaminate
the
White
House
as
a
workplace?
The
relationship
is
properly
the
subject
of
a
legal
discovery
process
in
cases
like
that
brought
by
Paula
Jones.
That
process
includes
investigating
a
possible
pattern
of
behavior
on
the
part
of
the
alleged
perpetrator.
Demonstrating
pattern
and
practice
is
often
the
only
way
a
plaintiff
in
a
sexual
harassment
suit
can
get
a
hearing.
After
all,
sexual
harassment
is
less
often
about
a
boss'
inappropriate
obsession
with
one
woman
than
about
bosses
who
behave
inappropriately
toward
many
women,
but
with
each
one
only
once.
Even
if
it
turns
out
that
Ms.
Lewinsky
had
a
consensual
relationship
with
the
president,
Mr.
Clinton
would
not
be
exempt
from
investigation.
When
power
differences
between
the
two
people
involved
are
extreme,
consent
counts
for
little.
So
the
Supreme
Court
said
in
1986.
when
it
ruled
that
the
primary
factor
in
determining
sexual
harassment
is
unwcl-comencss.
not
consent
Many
women
feel
pressured
to
meet
the
sexual
requests
of
their
bosses
technically,
give
their
"consent"
even
by
If
his
"he"
the
Santa
New
cnprial
ynninff
favnr
frr
Palm
J
Rarh
Pnnntu
Pnmmiinnpr
Carol
Roberts'
son
was
arrogant
and
sneaky
or
sloppy,
at
the
least.
,
Just
as
bad
is
Commissioner
Mary
McCarty's
mock
outrage.
I
In
1989,
Commissioner
Roberts
voted
to
change
the
zoning
on
property
in
Lantana
that
her
son,
Mark,
intended
to
buy.
Dr.
Roberts,
a
dentist,
wanted
a
change
to
commercial
from
residential.
;
Not
only
did
Commissioner
Roberts
vote
for
the
change,
she
made
the
motion
to
approve
it.
Not
only
that,
her
vote
was
crucial
in
the
3-2
approval.
Not
only
that,
county
staff
had
recommended
against
making
the
change.
At
the
time,
state
law
did
not
prevent
Commissioner
Roberts
from
voting.
Still,
abstaining
would
have
been
the
only
way
to
avoid
what
any
outsider
would
call
a
conflict
of
interest.
If
she
felt
she
had
to
vote,
Commissioner
Roberts
should
have
backed
the
staffs
recommendation.
(
Nothing
happened
on
the
property
until
1997,
when
Dr.
Roberts
asked
for
an
update
on
zoning.
County
staff
was
surprised
to
find
that
maps
continued
to
show
the
property
zoned
for
residential.
After
a
lawyer
for
Dr.
Roberts
produced
documents
showing
the
1989
change,
Best
kind
of
ellington
officials
who
have
drawn
criticism
for
hiring
too
many
consultants
have
the
perfect
comeback
tonight:
a
contract
that
will
save
residents
20
percent
on
trash
collection.
Voters
approved
incorporation
of
Wellington
in
November
1995.
Eighteen
months
ago,
the
village
council
hired
Charles
Lynn
as
manager.
He
has
hired
several
consultants,
calling
them
"investments
that
yield
dividends."
'
A
consultant,
for
example,
suggested
the
village
could
save
at
least
10
percent
on
trash
collection.
When
the
contract
was
put
out
to
bid,
five
companies
submitted
proposals.
The
$1,047,719
Browning-Ferris
Industries
contract
that
council
members
will
approve
tonight
will
save
$12
million
over
five
years.
The
consultant
got
$30,000.
The
village
can
also
charge
BFI
a
Correction
Because
of
outdated
information
supplied
to
the
newspaper,
an
editorial
in
Friday's
Post
incorrectly
identified
the
law
firm
representing
Everglades
Regional
Medical
Center
in
its
dispute
with
the
Palm
Beach
County
Health
Care
District
The
firm's
name
is
Witterson
Hylatrfi
&
Klctt
to
Mr.
on
to
$2
who
of
the
who
up
the
Kathleen
Parker
is
a
columnist
for
the
Orlando
Sentinel.
i
the
pass
inougn
tney
may
not
welcome
tne
re
quests
or
liaisons,
may
not
solicit
them
and
may
also
be
offended
by
them.
That
so
many
feminists
don't
appreci
ate
the
distinction
between
welcomeness
and
consent
bodes
ill
for
sexual
harass
ment
law.
Similarly,
when
some
feminists
claim
that
what
Ms.
Jones
and
Ms.
Willey
have
accused
the
president
of
doing
isn't
really
sexual
harassment
because
it
happened
only
once
and
because
the
president
took
no
for
an
answer,
they
are
forgetting
something
important:
I
here
is
no
numerical
threshold
for
harassment
,
Nor
does
the
law
say
each
boss
gets
to
ask
each
female
worker
for
oral
sex
once
as
long
as
he
doesn't
force
her
when
she
says
no.
There
would
be
precious
little
protection
for
women
if
all
male
bosses
were
entitled
to
one
free
hit.
We
must
affirm
the
distinction
drawn
the
Supreme
Court
between
welcomeness
and
consent.
Otherwise
no
woman
who
unwillingly
succumbs
to
her
boss
will
have
any
legal
recourse.
We
must
also
insist
that
even
one
unwelcome
sexual
advance
is
too
manyj
what
Ms.
Jones
and
Ms.
Willey
say
is
"
true,
the
fact
that
the
president
didn't
force
them
to
have
sex
would
not
exonerate
him
from
harassment
charges.
''
Many
people,
including
some
feminists,
construe
this
president's
alleged
misconduct
as
being
"just
about
sex."
To
the
defendant
in
any
sexual
harassment
case,
discovery
and
cross-examination
are
indeed
"just
about
sex."
since
sex
is,
after
all,
one
goal
of
the
harasser.
If
we
permit
the
president
to
escape
obligation
to
tell
the
truth
because
the
subject
is
"only"
sex,
then
defendants
in
future
harassment
cases
may
claim
the
same
exemption.
In
a
he-said-she-said
situation
where
has
power
and
"she"
does
not
.
which
is
common
in
harassment
cases
defendant's
stonewalling
will
always
deprive
the
plaintiff
of
a
fair
hearing.
GurnJitlyn
Mink
is
a
professor
of
ptilittcs
at
the
L'nirersity
of
California
at
Cruz.
She
wrote
this
article
for
The
York
Times.
Gloria
Steinem
and
the
rest
of
her
ilk
have
not
only
missed
the
boat,
they've
overturned
it
in
their
zeal
to
defend
the
president
-
possibly
compromising
20
years
of
sexual
harassment
jurisprudence.
By
Gwendolyn
Mink
Dn
the
debate
surrounding
the
investigation
of
President
Clinton,
some
feminists
have
painted
the
rest
of
us
into
a
corner.
Defending
the
president,
they
have
argued
that
what
he
is
accused
of
doing
is
not
sexual
harassment.
This
distorts
the
law
and
trivializes
women's
experiences.
Kathleen
Willey
has
described
her
self
as
a
volunteer
worker
seeking
paid
employment
at
the
time
she
says
she
was
groped
by
the
president
Yet
according
to
Gloria
Steinem,
she
was
just
"a
supporter"
at
whom
Bill
Clinton
made
a
"reck
less
pass."
Feminism
is
supposed
to
be
about
taking
seriously
what
women
say
about
themselves.
But
here
is
a
leading
feminist
rewriting
another
woman's
experi
ence
to
protect
a
man
and
in
enect
compromising
20
years
of
sexual
harassment
jurisprudence.
Ms.
Steinem
is
not
alone
among
feminists
in
this
retreat
from
sexual
harassment
law.
Though
Patricia
Ireland,
the
presi
dent
of
the
National
Organization
for
Women,
defended
Ms.
Willey
after
the
60
Minutes
interview,
Ms.
Ireland
has
drawn
troubling
distinctions
between
the
cases
of
Ms.
Willey
and
Monica
Lewinsky.
Ms.
Ireland
has
said
that
the
alleged
relationship
between
Ms.
Lewinsky
and
the
president
did
not
involve
sexual
harassment
because,
as
reported,
it
was
consensual
and
violated
only
private
mar
ital
vows,
not
public
prohibitions
against
sex
discrimination.
But
how
do
we
know
that?
The
legal
inquiry
has
not
been
completed.
If
there